The full story...

Google steps up the fight against child pornography

ELEANOR HALL: The internet giant, Google, says it is taking a stand against child pornography by creating a database of images to make it easier for internet companies to remove child pornography from the web.

It's the company's response to criticism that it hasn't done enough to control the traffic of offensive images.

Reporter Katie Hamann has more.

KATIE HAMANN: In the past month British MPs have heaped criticism upon the internet giant Google for, what they view, as a reluctance on the part of the company to crack down on child internet pornography, directly challenging the their famous moniker, 'don't be evil!'

On Sunday, Google hit back, announcing the creation of an online database of offensive images that can be accessed by other companies and organisations - making it easier, they say, for the material to be removed.

CATHARINE LUMBY: And I think what's particularly important is that Google is demonstrating leadership when it comes to working with civil and government organisations on what is a really appalling abuse of human rights.

KATIE HAMANN: In a statement published online, Google says the new database will use 'hashing' technology, which enables them to identify duplicate images elsewhere online.

Offending pictures are given a unique ID that computers can recognise without humans having to view them.

Google has been using this technique since 2008, but says it will now incorporate encrypted "fingerprints" of child sexual abuse images into a cross-industry database, enabling other companies, law enforcement agencies and charities to more easily detect and remove offensive content and, potentially, track down those responsible for it.

David Cake is the chairman of Electronic Frontiers Australia, which campaigned against the Government's controversial internet filter.

He says Google's latest initiative is a welcome development:

DAVID CAKE: The real change is Google is making available a technological solution. They are working towards being part of that actively, rather than being a passive consumer of someone else's list.

KATIE HAMANN: Professor Catherine Lumby was also opposed to the Government's internet filter:

CATHARINE LUMBY: The difference here is this hashing technology has been developed and been shown to be effective, and also the genre of the material that's being focused on is narrow and specific. And I think that's very different to a broad internet filter which trawls across a whole range of material.

KATIE HAMANN: Some of the $5 million that Google has committed to identifying illegal content will be given to internet monitoring charities such as the UK-based Internet Watch Foundation and unspecified groups in Australia.

David Cake says the question of who decides which images are offensive could be problematic.

DAVID CAKE: We have had some concerns with organisations like the Internet Watch Foundation that Google is now committed to supporting, so we'll certainly be looking at this in some detail. I mean, famously, the IWF once ended up blocking most of Wikipedia due to one 1970s album cover, and that sort of issue may still remain.

But, providing that the technology is used appropriately and carefully, we think there's promise here.

From the Archives

Sri Lanka is now taking stock of the country's 26-year-long civil war, in which the UN estimates as many as 40,000 Tamil civilians may have been killed. This report by the ABC's Alexander McLeod in 1983 looks at the origins of the conflict as it was just beginning.